Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.
Skip to main content

Abstract:

It is only recently that PPI has been seen as a key part of healthcare practice and some form of PPI has been almost universally adopted throughout the NHS in England. However, although it is widely recognised that PPI is important by a wide range of different groups, from activists and patient groups, professional organisations to government bodies, within this broad endorsement there are a host of unresolved issues: what is the overriding justification and value base of PPI? There is also uncertainty over what the role of the PPI contributor is or should be and what such roles contribute to decision-making? This paper will consider these issues and how these, possibly, competing rationales for PPI affect the assessment PPI activities.

BIO:

Lucy Frith is Reader in Bioethics and Social Science at the University of Liverpool. Her research focuses on the social and ethical aspects of improving healthcare delivery, policy and regulation, with a particular interest in empirical ethics and the inter-section between ethics and social science. She has published widely on a range of issues in bioethics and carried out research on pregnancy and childbirth; research ethics (clinical trials and public involvement and cross-cultural issues in consent); the organisation and funding of health care provision (priority setting and use of resources); and has a long-standing interest in the social and ethical aspects of reproductive technologies. She is Strategic Lead for Public Involvement in the North West NIHR Research Design Service.